Defcon Robot Wars?

**kraa26** · September 4, 2003, 17:52

The rules are no where near complete. Those are just the ones that me and Russ have actually already decided on.

**guano** · September 5, 2003, 11:17

Originally posted by TwinVega

An idea....
There could be a race to get to the other side of the pool, you could either go through the pool, or around it, through it will be a shorter distance but you'll have to make a bot that will drop in, and then climb up the other side....just thought I'd put that thought in the creative minds of the creators of el contesto

I like this idea!
I assume we'd be allowed to place a beacon of some kind on the target (other end of the pool).
And size may not matter much here...

**pezz** · September 6, 2003, 00:41

Originally posted by guano

I like this idea!
I assume we'd be allowed to place a beacon of some kind on the target (other end of the pool).
And size may not matter much here...

Size always matters....

**blackwave** · September 6, 2003, 02:25

Originally posted by guano

I like this idea!
I assume we'd be allowed to place a beacon of some kind on the target (other end of the pool).
And size may not matter much here...

you see in a race a lot of people think something with wheels and radio control... what about a rocket on wheels, or just a barrage of rockets in more of a shotgun technique that one hopefully will take out the competition (temporarily), as well as hit the target multiple times... of course there are also catapults, ballistae and trebuchets that would work quite nicely in hitting targets from great distance in a matter of seconds... of course it would be best not too have large crowd gatherings around the finishing area... not robots you say? Sure they are. Remember by definition the word robot includes "A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control.", "a mechanism that can move automatically ", " A mechanical device for performing a task which might otherwise be done by a human", etc...

In short, will thinking "outside the box" but within the letter of the final rules be encouraged or penalized?

**russ** · September 6, 2003, 09:11

Yeah, they weren't meant for publication yet, though. ;-)

Originally posted by kraa26

The rules are no where near complete. Those are just the ones that me and Russ have actually already decided on.

**guano** · September 6, 2003, 10:48

Originally posted by blackwave

you see in a race a lot of people think something with wheels and radio control... what about a rocket on wheels, or just a barrage of rockets in more of a shotgun technique that one hopefully will take out the competition (temporarily), as well as hit the target multiple times... of course there are also catapults, ballistae and trebuchets that would work quite nicely in hitting targets from great distance in a matter of seconds... of course it would be best not too have large crowd gatherings around the finishing area... not robots you say? Sure they are. Remember by definition the word robot includes "A machine or device that operates automatically or by remote control.", "a mechanism that can move automatically ", " A mechanical device for performing a task which might otherwise be done by a human", etc...

In short, will thinking "outside the box" but within the letter of the final rules be encouraged or penalized?

I was thinking along those lines, but I think "all parts of the robot must reach the target."
If you use a cannon to launch yourself, you damn well better find a way to take the cannon with you.

It should also be repeatable. Thus, a rocket has finite use and cannot be repetitive. Batteries, on the other hand, can be recharged. (Hmmm... I guess rockets can be recharged, but at a higher expense.)

By the way, will there be a Bikini Vanna Lifeguard to recover any victims that fall in the pool? (Robot, human, whatever...) :-)

**blackwave** · September 6, 2003, 11:17

Originally posted by guano

I was thinking along those lines, but I think "all parts of the robot must reach the target."
If you use a cannon to launch yourself, you damn well better find a way to take the cannon with you.

This "rule" alone could be circumvented by simply attaching a cable to both said cannon and projectile... the cable would show that this device has remain whole and just happens to be both at the initial start point and the target... this of course can then be prevented by stating in the rules that "robot cannot be at the initial starting point AND at the target at the same time" ... but if it isn't stated explicity there will be bitching. :) thus rules for hackers...

Originally posted by guano

It should also be repeatable.

Well whether it should be repeatable would be left to the rule-makers, although such rule would be stated such as that "what the robot can do, must be done x-times in a row without assistance from robot team"... thus meaning that the robot if need be recharged can recharge itself... meaning that it either needs to initiate a secondary sequence... be able to find its station pad (which has not been declared if there can be an additional one other than the initial point... etc.. sooo many rules to hone and shave... all which likely will make the rule-makers try and make the rules simpler by making the initial constructs limited... otherwise complexities will rule over the rules and confusion will be a heavy cloud.

Originally posted by guano

By the way, will there be a Bikini Vanna Lifeguard to recover any victims that fall in the pool? (Robot, human, whatever...) :-)

mmmm... any chance of getting "7 of 9", as the theme would be fitting ;) :D

btw, I am sure that between you, shatter and I will certainly drive russ and kraa26 to suicidal and even homicidal thoughts... ;)

**kraa26** · September 10, 2003, 10:42

Originally posted by blackwave

btw, I am sure that between you, shatter and I will certainly drive russ and kraa26 to suicidal and even homicidal thoughts... ;)

Lol.

Kraa

**DISINGENUOUS** · September 10, 2003, 13:28

Originally posted by blackwave

mmmm... any chance of getting "7 of 9", as the theme would be fitting ;) :D

btw, I am sure that between you, shatter and I will certainly drive russ and kraa26 to suicidal and even homicidal thoughts... ;)

Lord knows that it wouldn't be the first time I've done that....

**guano** · September 10, 2003, 14:44

Originally posted by blackwave

btw, I am sure that between you, shatter and I will certainly drive russ and kraa26 to suicidal and even homicidal thoughts... ;)

The wardriving and scavanger hunt have special rules just because someone learned how to abuse the system.

I want a rule named after me. That is MY goal for the Robot Wars.
:-)

**russ** · September 12, 2003, 06:47

As long as we can get you off of this battle bot kick, we'll be in good shape. ;-) I'm not driving for that concept at all. Maybe that's the issue... We just need to define the KEY attribute we're looking for in this contest. Kraa and I discussed some that we're looking for, but what else comes to mind? Obviously we can't do everything this year, but we should focus on the cooler ones. Here's what we tossed around so far:

Functionality: What can the bot do?
Versatility: How many different things can it do?
Cool Factor: How f8ckin' cool is that shite?!
Value: A $100 homemade robot that does everything versus a $1000 robot that only does a couple of tricks...

One we haven't talked about yet might be Ingenuity. "Damn that's cool! Wish I had thought of it!"

What else?

Originally posted by blackwave

mmmm... any chance of getting "7 of 9", as the theme would be fitting ;) :D

btw, I am sure that between you, shatter and I will certainly drive russ and kraa26 to suicidal and even homicidal thoughts... ;)

**DISINGENUOUS** · September 12, 2003, 13:24

Originally posted by russ

What else?

Autonomous operation should be a must. It's a robot contest, not RC car.

:)

**blackwave** · September 12, 2003, 16:23

Originally posted by Shatter

Autonomous operation should be a must. It's a robot contest, not RC car.

most excellent, or have it rely on sensors - magnetic, ir, sound... of course if the other bot was smart it would be able to throw decoy signals... and that was just rule.

of course you could also get two ipaqs and program them to start hacking one another... but that wouldn't be as fun to watch...

**russ** · September 13, 2003, 16:02

It shouldn't be too terribly difficult to get a Palm pilot or something to control the bot. So we want the bots to be totally self sufficient? Or do we only really care about that for certain contests? It certainly would raise the bar on the entrants. I can see some seriously cool shit coming out of this.

Originally posted by blackwave

most excellent, or have it rely on sensors - magnetic, ir, sound... of course if the other bot was smart it would be able to throw decoy signals... and that was just rule.

of course you could also get two ipaqs and program them to start hacking one another... but that wouldn't be as fun to watch...

**blackwave** · September 13, 2003, 18:02

Originally posted by russ

It shouldn't be too terribly difficult to get a Palm pilot or something to control the bot. So we want the bots to be totally self sufficient? Or do we only really care about that for certain contests? It certainly would raise the bar on the entrants. I can see some seriously cool shit coming out of this.

Here an idea I just had... for those whom can't jump the bar, there can be one contest... of course the HaXXXor-Bot ... basically being the beauty bot, only because its main function is to look seXXXy, streamlined and painted up like 2000$ whore... and is just supposed to "be there" and look good.... otherwise the other bots should be created by their maker and then given "free will"...

I have spoken with a few people who intend on entering and they have already assumed that an automaton is the way to go otherwise as shatter mentioned you will get a crap load of modded RC cars...

Defcon Robot Wars?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment